It is not uncommon for video source devices (i.e. devices capable of outputting video data, such as Digital Versatile Disc (DVD) players, High-Density (HD) DVD players, Blu-ray disc players, set-top boxes, or PCs) and video sink devices (i.e. devices capable of receiving a video signal and further processing the data and/or displaying video images, such as televisions or monitors, which may be analog or digital devices such as Cathode Ray Tubes (CRTs), flat panel displays such as Liquid Crystal Displays (LCDs) or or plasma displays, or rear-projection displays such as Digital Light Processing (DLP) or Liquid Crystal on Silicon (LCoS) displays for example) to be purchased separately. For example, a consumer assembling a home entertainment system may purchase the video source device component from one manufacturer and the video sink device component from another manufacturer. The consumer's choice of components may be motivated by such factors as consumer preference, availability, or retailer promotions. The consumer may then interconnect the components within the home entertainment system so that the source device outputs video data to the sink device. The interconnection may be by way of one or more cables and may conform to a known industry standard, such as VGA, composite/S-video or component out, Digital Visual Interface (DVI), High-Definition Multimedia Interface™ (HDMI™) or DisplayPort®, for example.
Many contemporary video source devices are capable of applying numerous video processing algorithms to video data to improve the appearance or quality of the video images comprising the output video data. The video processing algorithms may fall into various categories, such as scan-rate conversion, interlacing, de-interlacing, de-noise (e.g. removal of analog broadcast noise), scaling, color correction, contrast correction and detail enhancement for example. Examples of video processing algorithms within the interlacing category include scan line decimation and vertical filtering. The video processing algorithms that are actually applied at the source device at any given time may be based on various factors, such as the nature of the video data (e.g. frame rate) or user preferences (e.g. an indication to use the maximum frame rate possible).
A video sink device may also be capable of applying numerous video processing algorithms to received video data, including some or all of the same video processing algorithms that the upstream video source device is capable of performing (referred to as “overlapping video processing capabilities”). The overlap may be by virtue of the fact that the video sink device is a modular component that is intended to be capable of interconnection with various types of video source devices whose video processing capabilities may vary. The video source device and video sink device may each have different strengths and weaknesses from a video processing standpoint. For example, the source device may be capable of numerous scan-rate conversion algorithms that the sink device is incapable of executing, while the sink device is capable of numerous de-interlacing algorithms that the source device is incapable of executing.
Disadvantageously, no convenient mechanism exists for identifying overlapping video processing capabilities as between a video source device and a video sink device.
A solution which obviates or mitigates the above-noted shortcoming would be desirable.